Is it possible that Matt Cooper is glad Time will hand over the sources?

[AlCzervik]

OK this might sound strange but if Time hands over the emails then he's kind off the hook to a point as far as not divulging his sources, he can say "Time did it and not me"

[napi21]

1. He says he dosen't like what Time is going to do, but

I must admit, if it were me, I'd be secretely glad. It should keep him from going to jail, while still preserving his integrity.

[Hepburn]

3. IMO...

...Cooper's conduct in disobeying the court order has nada to do with whatever TIME chooses to do. A contempt citation is personal to the conduct of a particular person. Just because the USAtty got the info from another source, IMO, it does not absolve Cooper of his disobedience of the court order directed at him which compelled him to testify.

[kenny blankenship]

25. IF there's a trial, he might still be called

I think he would be. No prosecutor is just going to read someone's "notes" into the evidence.

[Hepburn]

28. He would have to be called to testify...

....because the defense did not have opportunity in the GJ to X-exam him. A defendant has a right to confront his accusers. So, no, his testimony before the GJ cannot be used in lieu of him appearance. He is available to testify.

[Hepburn]

2. How can he cite "Time?"

Time is a business entity ~ it has no personal knowledge of any facts of a matter. The reporter himself/herself are the people who have knowledge of the facts. And a business entity cannot formulate the requiste intent to commit a crime. Members of the organization can do so, but not the enitity itself.

Cooper was cited for contempt for HIS conduct, not the conduct of his employer. He was the one who went before the GJ and to USAtty Fitzgerald's questions, Cooper refused to testify ~ citing a privilege as a journalist that he did not have to reveal sources.

[AlCzervik]

4. well Time says his emails belong to them and they eill give them

over to Fitzgerald.

[Hepburn]

5. That is the conduct of TIME...

...and NOT the conduct of Cooper. TIME was not cited for contempt, Cooper was. It is irrelevant IMO what TIME does with the documents/info it has viz Cooper purging himself of the finding of contempt for his own conduct. HE was ordered to testify ~ TIME was not.

[AlCzervik]

6. i understand that but since Time will give them the info they seek

is it possible that will get him off the hook? I'm just wondering what behind the scene manuvers are going on.

[Hepburn]

9. IMO...

..it is not possible to absolve some one of a contempt by the action of a third party when the contemptor had the ability to comply with the court order and willfully refused to do so. It is HIS conduct which violated the order compelling him to testify. The actions of third parties, no matter who, are not relevant to the act which caused the court to find him in contempt.

[napi21]

11. I agree with you sort of.

It's true that Time is a third party here, but if the US Atty gets the info he wanted (which I assume is in the emails Time is turning over) what reason would he have to persue getting Cooper sent to jail?

As I understand it, even if Cooper went to jail, he could get out any time if he simply gave the confidential source info to the US Atty.

If the US Atty already has the info, there would be no reason to put Cooper in jail.

[AlCzervik]

12. thats kind of what i'm thinking, maybe Cooper made a deal with Time

and Fitzgerald.

[H2O Man]

14. If body language talks

Mr. Cooper is saving face.

[Hepburn]

20. If this were true...

...then the announcement IMO would have been that either Cooper was turning it over and/or he agreed with what TIME was doing. Remember: It is his BUTT which is at risk and not that of TIME. He goes to jail on the contempt ~ they do not. And it is the judge who decides if Cooper has purged himself of the conduct. What TIME is going to do, IMO, has NO legal relationship to the contempt against Cooper. However, if Cooper joins in ~ that might mean something to the judge on the issues of whether Cooper had purges and/on on sentencing him for his disobedience of the court order.

[Hepburn]

17. It's the JUDGE and not the USAtty...

...who made the finding of the contempt. The USAtty cannot simply request that the judge reverse the finding based on a third party handing over the info. He can join in an argument and concur with the same if raised by the attys for Cooper. However, IMO, that would be a difficult position for the government to take. The reason for my opinion is that, as stated before, it was the conduct of a 3rd party agreeing to comply with a subpoena for its records by which the information was turned over. The contempt citation is PERSONAL to Cooper. And the fact that another entity, TIME, complied with the subpoena is not relevant to Cooper's refusal to obey the court order compelling HIM to testify. If he had the documents, to wit, the emails or copies thereof, in his posssession, the fact that another entity may claim to be the owner's of the same, IMO, that does not absolve him of turning over what HE has nor does that absolve him of testifying as to any percipient information which he has ~ i.e., what he actually witnessed besides the content of the emails, etc.

As to the amount of jail time on the contempt: There are two uses of a contempt by the court: 1. To punish; and 2. To compel. From what I have read, the court will set a period of time for which Cooper will be sentenced on the contempt (assuming he does not purge himself by the deadline which the court has set) and since this is a set time sentence, IMO, the court is looking at "punishment." If you recall the matter of Susan McDougal...she was just sent to jail for her refusal to testify and she was brought to court over and over and asked to testify and sent back to jail when she refused. That is an example of the court using its contempt powers to "coerce."

It is NOT the USAtty who "put Cooper in jail." It is Cooper himself by his refusal to testify who put Cooper in jail. And it was the judge who made a finding as to the following elements of a contempt:

1. A valid court order
2. Actual knowledge of the order
3. Ability to comply
4. Willful disobedience

The above elements are what put Cooper in jail and not anyone else's conduct.

[H2O Man]

7. TIME

faced fines for withholding documents in their possesion.

It is unclear if Cooper, who has his personal notes still, will now cooperate with the investigation. It seems likely, as the documents TIME is handing over will identify his sources, and provide related background information.

[Hepburn]

10. I agree....

....TIME powers that be want no problems of their own with this.

[H2O Man]

13. I think there is

something brewing just under the surface, besides what most people suspect, that TIME wants to distance itself from. The idea that Hannah and Wurmser knew Plame's identity, and decided on their own to leak it, doesn't hold up. According to Wilson, Rove was very upset that he had been led to believe it was safe to discuss Plame with Matthews. Who could have led Rove to believe this? Not Hannah or Wurmser. I think that the democratic request for more information on Bolton's demands for information on intel agents investigating WMD issues is about to cross paths with the Plame grand jury.

[Hepburn]

18. IMO...

....it is pretty clear by now that BushCo owned the MSM. That I believe to be the problem. The leaks on many things came from high up in the Bush Admin and went to high ups in the MSM. The MSM liked to be on the inside track. So, yeah, now that the shit has hit the fan over outing the ID of Plame, I am sure that a few higher ups in the MSM are a bit concerned about what other knowledge they have and being called to reveal not only on the Plame leak, but on other things.

Hey, you know the deal ~ you lie down with dogs......

And as to Rove: Do you recall, and IIRC, that at one time Rove's position with the WH was classified as a "staffer" and then he was given that promotion which put his position as a member of the Executive Branch??? Well, IIRC, that came down about the time that the matter of Plame was heating up ~ and it was taken from the DOJ because of Ashcroft and the conflict of interest. So, what would Rove be able to claim as a member of the Exec and not as a mere staffer? EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE.

I am able to see the X-over with Bolton as well. Seems to me, there was a LOT going on and that the digging in Plame is going to expose much more than the crime of outing her ID.

[H2O Man]

23. In an October 2003

press briefing, Scott McClellan went out of his way to say about Rove that, "The president knows he wasn't involved." He didn't allow himself to make a similar comment about two other weasals deserving to be high-lighted in our discussions here -- Scooter Libby and Eliot Abrams.

Wilson took some of this to "indicate that the administration's defense is extremely narrow: the leakers and pushers of the story did not know the undercover status of Valerie Plame, and therefore, though they might have disclosed her name, they did not commit a crime." (Wilson; page 445)

[Hepburn]

26. I would find that theory of defense...

...very hard to sell at time of trial to a jury. And at any Fed Rule 11 Conference, I would not put that idea out as a defense to the ASUA or USAtty who had the case. IMO, that is pure BS and IMO, I would expect the following back: Why then did they chose to disclose her identity at all? That defense does not work for me and IMO it creates bigger problems than it was meant to solve. Some legal stragetist IMO is not looking ahead at the possible ramifications of that defense and IMO was only buying time or merely diverting/deflecting.

I find the denial about Rove hard to believe ~ but that is somewhat of a gut reaction. IMO, there would not be any dirty political tricks coming out of BushCo about which Rove had no knowledge whatsoever. That just is very hard to believe, at least for me.

[H2O Man]

29. On 3-8-03

there was a meeting in VP Cheney's office, to discuss what the White House could do to discredit Wilson. The meeting, which is covered on page 452 of Wilson's book, indicates that the group involved included Libby, Cheney, and Newt Gingrich (!). If Fitzgerald has included an examination of this meeting as one of the starting points of the decision to expose Plame, I think that we will see Rove took a "leadership" position in the entire thing.

[Hepburn]

30. Excellent point, IMO...

...and the timing fits ~ 10 days before Bush sent his letter to Congress on the reasons to invade Iraq.

No doubt in my mind ~ Rove was involved.

[Stephanie]

19. Oh wow! I missed a lot!

When did we learn it's Hannah and Wurmser? When did we learn Rove talked to Cooper? Is this news today? Holy smokes!

[H2O Man]

21. "When did we learn Rove talked to Cooper?"

I'm not sure what you mean.

Regarding Hannah and Wurmser -- Wilson had noted that people had suggested they were the sources of some of the calls to journalists. I believe that Hannah confirmed this to the grand jury. Rove called at least Matthews, which Matthews confirmed; he is believed to have called Andrea Mitchell and possibly others.

[Stephanie]

31. my mistake - Rove talked to Matthews, not Matt Cooper

So we don't have anything new yet - but it's looking promising!

[CityDem]

8. Cooper is happy

Publicly, he is stating that Time should not hand over the documents. Deep down inside, he does not want to go to prison over this. If he really opposes Time on this he will resign -- I doubt he will.

The unfortunate part of this story is that we are talking about a couple reporters going to jail instead of AWOL, Rove, Rumsfeld, Rice, et al.

[QuettaKid]

15. Norman Pearlstein, Editor of Time....

all but said on NPR just now that the notes DO contain the name of the leaker...

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4724738

[H2O Man]

16. Yes.

They do. There is no question about that. The only issue that remains might be what Cooper's hand-written notes say, and what context Cooper might be able to give.

[Hepburn]

22. Yes, that is a good issue...

...if it was Cooper who directly received info from the leaker and his notes are a memorialization of the same ~ he will have to testify as to a few things. Even minimal things such as giving the USAtty the factual info with which to authenticate the contents of the notes. IMO, Cooper is NOT in a position at this time to refuse to testify. If he refuses again to testify, and this would be on different questions from Fitzgerald as to the documents from TIME, and IMO, Cooper is going to find himself facing another contempt citation and I think we all know what the outcome of that would be ~ more jail time.

[H2O Man]

24. People who watch ESPN boxing

are familiar with commentator Teddy Atlas's saying certain boxers are "looking for an opportunity to have the ref stop the fight for them." Cooper looks like a fellow on the ropes. I think he will testify now, although outside the grand jury hearings he may feign wanting to continue his noble fight.

[Hepburn]

27. Totally agree....

...and since GJ hearings are sealed, at least for a time he can keep up appearances.